【正文】 rests of parties after the performance measures exist in name only , to the detriment of the party after the performance period of interest. The problem is our new Contract Law on the mon law and civil law related to the integration of the system caused not go far enough and needs to be resolved through judicial interpretation. Second, the heavy burden of proof. And the implied mon law and civil law is expected to breach the system unstable defense system allows a lower limit of the subjective judgments of different, our contract law the burden of proof requirements are stringent. Contract Law sixtyeighth article: there is no conclusive evidence to suspend the performance of the parties, it shall be liable for breach. The party exercising the right of defense should be disturbed by the burden of proof, which is recognized by national laws, but even more perfect in the national market rules, to obtain clear evidence is no easy task, not to mention the current legal environment in China is not perfect, to grasp the conclusive evidence quite difficult, to pay a lot of manpower and material resources. Therefore, the parties have not allowed a lower limit of the subjective judgments, although the parties can avoid undue anxiety or abuse of the exercise of the right of defense, but the party has greatly increased the cost of using the unstable defense, defenses against the original intention of the establishment of anxiety. Therefore, the first performance of parties in the required burden of proof at the same time, request the evidence to the contrary must carry responsibility for the negative side, in order to reduce the use of unstable defense costs. Third, the appropriate security was ambiguous. Contract Law stipulates that the sixtyninth, when the postperformance party with the appropriate security, the first performance of one performance of the contract should be restored. But for the appropriate security and appropriate level, the law did not make specific provisions, which left a party to the opportunity to perform first. Be inappropriate to perform in the name of one can refuse to fulfill their security do not want to fulfill the contract, resulting in the loss of a party after the performance. Should therefore be the appropriate security to make clear judicial interpretation, make the law more clear. In summary we can see that China39。s Contract Law Plea to the right of civil law system and the system of mon law breach of contract is expected to bine to form an uneasy with Chinese characteristics, the system defenses, reflecting the civil law and mon legal systems integration trend of the times, representing the development trend of the world39。s civil and mercial law. However, due to lack of experience, Contract Law Plea in the right system there are still some problems need to practice, judicial interpretation and the court together to solve them. Tatsiana Seliazniove. Prospective NonPerformance or Anticipatory Breach of Contract. Cambridge university press, 2010附錄二未來(lái)預(yù)期違約的不履行由英美法系預(yù)期違約制度引入的有關(guān)規(guī)定與不安抗辯權(quán)制度間存在矛盾?！　　逗贤ā返诰攀臈l第二款規(guī)定：“在履行期限屆滿之前，當(dāng)事人一方明確表示或者以自己的行為表明不履行主要債務(wù)”，另一方“當(dāng)事人可以解除合同”。這條規(guī)定是由英美法系的預(yù)期違約制度引入的，它給與了當(dāng)事人解除合同的權(quán)利。法律并沒(méi)有限制這種權(quán)利適用于何種場(chǎng)合，因此可以認(rèn)為這條規(guī)定對(duì)同時(shí)履行和先后履行兩種場(chǎng)合都是適用的。一方當(dāng)事人明確表示不履行債務(wù)時(shí)，另一方當(dāng)事人適用第九十四條規(guī)定，直接享有解除權(quán)，這與英美法系對(duì)明示預(yù)期違約的處理是相同的。但當(dāng)一方當(dāng)事人以自己的行為表明不履行主要債務(wù)時(shí)，既可以解釋為一方當(dāng)事人以自己的行為表明其不履行主要債務(wù)，另一方當(dāng)事人可以直接解除合同，這是英美法系對(duì)默示預(yù)期違約的處理方法；又可解釋為第六十八條第四款“喪失或者可能喪失履行債務(wù)能力的其他情形”，這時(shí)另一方當(dāng)事人只享有不安抗辯權(quán)，可以中止合同的履行，等待相對(duì)人提供履約保證，但無(wú)權(quán)直接解除合同，這是大陸法系對(duì)默示預(yù)期違約的處理方法。兩種不同的處理方法出現(xiàn)在了同一部法律里，造成了法律適用上的矛盾。如果賦予先履行人選擇適用第九十四條的權(quán)利，則極有可能造成先履行一方濫用合同解除權(quán)的局面，使得第六十八條所設(shè)置的一系列旨在保護(hù)后履行方合法權(quán)益的措施形同虛設(shè)，從而損害了后履行方的期限利益。這個(gè)問(wèn)題是我國(guó)新《合同法》對(duì)英美法系和大陸法系的相關(guān)制度的融合還不夠徹底造成的，需要通過(guò)司法解釋加以解決。　　二、舉證責(zé)任過(guò)重?！　∨c英美法系的默示預(yù)期違約制度和大陸法系的不安抗辯權(quán)制度允許有較低限度的主觀判斷不同，我國(guó)合同法對(duì)舉證責(zé)任的要求相當(dāng)嚴(yán)格。《合同法》第六十八條規(guī)定：“當(dāng)事人沒(méi)有確切證據(jù)中止履行的，應(yīng)當(dāng)承擔(dān)違約責(zé)任”。行使不安抗辯權(quán)的一方應(yīng)當(dāng)負(fù)舉證責(zé)任，這是各國(guó)法律所認(rèn)同的，但即使在市場(chǎng)規(guī)則比較完善的國(guó)家，要取得“確切證據(jù)”也決非易事，更何況目前我國(guó)的法制環(huán)境還不完善，要掌握“確切證據(jù)”相當(dāng)?shù)乩щy，需要付出大量的人力和物力。因此不允許當(dāng)事人有較低限度的主觀判斷，雖然可以避免當(dāng)事人不當(dāng)行使或?yàn)E用不安抗辯權(quán)，但卻大大增加了當(dāng)事人使用不安抗辯權(quán)的成本，有違設(shè)立不安抗辯權(quán)的初衷。因此可以在要求先履行方負(fù)舉證責(zé)任的同時(shí)，要求后履行方負(fù)一定的反證責(zé)任，以減少不安抗辯權(quán)的使用成本。　　三、“適當(dāng)擔(dān)?！焙x不清?！　　逗贤ā返诹艞l規(guī)定，當(dāng)后履行一方提供了“適當(dāng)擔(dān)保”后，先履行一方應(yīng)恢復(fù)合同的履行。但對(duì)于“適當(dāng)擔(dān)?！钡摹斑m當(dāng)”程度，法律并沒(méi)有做出明確的規(guī)定，這就給先履行一方留下了可乘之機(jī)。先履行一方可以以擔(dān)保不適當(dāng)為名拒絕履行其本不愿履行的合同，從而造成后履行一方的損失。因此應(yīng)當(dāng)對(duì)“適當(dāng)擔(dān)保”做出明確的司法解釋，使法律更清晰?！　【C上所述可以看到，我國(guó)的《合同法》將大陸法系不安抗辯權(quán)制度和英美法系預(yù)期違約制度有機(jī)結(jié)合，形成了有中國(guó)特色的不安抗辯權(quán)制度，體現(xiàn)了大陸法系和英美法系融合的時(shí)代潮流，代表著世界民商法發(fā)展的趨勢(shì)。但是由于經(jīng)驗(yàn)不足，《合同法》中的不安抗辯權(quán)制度仍然存在一些問(wèn)題，需要通過(guò)司法解釋和庭審實(shí)踐共同加以解決。，2010致 謝畢業(yè)論文暫告收尾，這也意味著我大學(xué)四年的學(xué)習(xí)生活即將結(jié)束?；厥准韧?，自己一生最寶貴的時(shí)光能在這樣的校園之中，能在眾多學(xué)富五車、才華橫溢的老師們的熏陶下度過(guò)，實(shí)在榮幸之極。在這四年里，我在學(xué)習(xí)和思想上都受益匪淺。這除了自身的努力之外，與各位老師、同學(xué)們的關(guān)心、支持和鼓勵(lì)是分不開(kāi)的。本論題是理論界一直討論的熱門(mén)話題。老師的諄諄教導(dǎo)、同學(xué)的出謀劃策及家長(zhǎng)的支持鼓勵(lì)，是我堅(jiān)持完成論文的動(dòng)力源泉。再此要特別感謝我的導(dǎo)師戴國(guó)勇的指導(dǎo)與督促，同時(shí)感謝他的諒解與包容。沒(méi)有戴國(guó)勇老師的幫助也就沒(méi)有今天的這篇論文。從論文的、文獻(xiàn)的采集、框架的設(shè)計(jì)、結(jié)構(gòu)的布局到最終的定稿，從內(nèi)容到格式，從標(biāo)題到標(biāo)點(diǎn)，他都費(fèi)盡心血，沒(méi)有戴國(guó)勇老師的辛勤栽培、孜孜教誨、就沒(méi)有我論文順利完成。求學(xué)歷程是艱苦的，但又是快樂(lè)的。感謝我所有的任課老師，謝謝他在這四年中為我所做的一切，他們不求回報(bào)，無(wú)私奉獻(xiàn)的精神很讓我感動(dòng)，再次向他表示由衷的感謝。在這四年的學(xué)期中結(jié)識(shí)的各位生活和學(xué)習(xí)上的摯友讓我得到了人生最大的一筆財(cái)富。在此，也對(duì)他們表示衷心感謝。本文參考了大量的文獻(xiàn)資料，在此，向各學(xué)術(shù)界的前輩們致敬！感謝我的同學(xué)和朋友，在我寫(xiě)論文的過(guò)程中給予我了很多你問(wèn)素材，還在論文的撰寫(xiě)和排版燈過(guò)程中提供熱情的幫助。由于我的學(xué)術(shù)水平有限，所寫(xiě)論文難免有不足之處，